♪ >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose". charlie rose: the u.s. supreme court begins a new term. voting rights, affirmative action are on the docket. the justices may decide to take cases on contraception and abortion. was term, same-sex marriage nationally legalized, and the affordable care act was upheld. this term, more decisions will be made. to talk about these issues, adam and jeffrey. i am pleased to have both. let me go first to adam, what does this look like and what do

we have to take note on? >> the big picture is that the left side of the court had a good year with a lot of liberal decisions and at liberal victories. this term, the early signs look like the empire strikes back and that the conservative roberts court we know will deliver more conservative opinions. justice kennedy is in the middle. i expect him to swing right. more than he did last term. in cases on affirmative action and public unions there is a , reason for the left to be nervous. charlie rose: they are tackling items of political significance. >> yes. they are. this is because of citizens united and the progeny. the cases that have come out of citizens united have revolutionized campaign financing in the united states. i think that the regulation of

-- i think the deregulation of american politics is likely to continue this year. there's also a very interesting case about redistricting, which is of course, deeply political, a very profound question about whether districts, congressional, legislative, can count the number of human beings or you count the number of voters in the district. that has a great deal of political significance. charlie rose: the chief justice may be a subject of political discussion in the republican primaries or the election. >> it is surprising. he has a conservative record and has only deviated from what the allies would want twice. people are running ads and comparing him to republican disappointments like kennedy and david souter. >> this is the evolution of the

republican party. there used to be moderates and a stash in their public and party. used to be a pretty big tent. it was reflected in the supreme court. you had sandra day o'connor in the 1980's. david souter was pretty much a liberal. john paul stevens was supported by gerald ford. but, the absence of any sort of moderation in the candidates running for president is reflected in their attitude towards the supreme court. that you can have a justice like , adam said, who has almost been almost 100%, with the only exception being the two affordable care act cases, and then you have people like ted cruz who say i would never have , voted for him and he is a disappointment, even though he has voted the conservative line in every case, except the

affordable care act cases. >> these are people who say whatever they want and they are unaffected by politics. then when you have slight deviation, all of a sudden, they are traitors. charlie rose: let's talk about the affirmative action texas case. what is at stake? adam this looks like a case : where the supreme court cuts back significantly on public universities to take race into account in admission decisions and it is the second trip for this case. i do not think they would have taken it a second time. at least somebody in the idiosyncratic university of texas is likely very much at risk. >> the appellate court ruled for the university. >> the supreme court said, you guys did not take a hard enough look. go back and take a hard look and

decide whether you really mean it, if this is constitutional, this plan, which allows admissions officers to take account of race. the appeals court says, yes, we still think it is constitutional. and then the supreme court takes it again, probably not to say yes that is right. >> every chief justice has a project. earl warren, his was ending segregation. warren burger was getting tough on crime. william rehnquist, states rights. i think john roberts' is getting rid of racial preferences. he had a famous line in one of his early opinions where he said, the way to get rid of discrimination on the basis of race, is to stop discriminating on the basis of race, and by that, he meant, any consideration of race by the government or a public institution like the university

of texas is unlawful. i think he will use this case, to the extent that he can get kennedy to come along, to do away with racial preferences in admissions. >> bear in mind that kennedy has never in his career voted to uphold an affirmative action program. so, if you take the chief justice's project and that he has four votes, the fifth vote has never voted for affirmative action, there is a lot of reason for liberals to be nervous. add to it that justice kagan is recused in the case. the liberal numbers are diminished. will the affordable care act be considered one more time by the court? >> the provisions will be considered for decades. it is so enormous.

>> very likely. but none of these cases have , the magnitude of the one decided last year or the constitutionality of the individual mandate. the affordable care act is here to stay, unless congress overturns it with a republican president. the courts are now done with the law. many aspects of the law will be before the court. charlie rose: including contraception. the question is, for companies that have religious objections to certain forms of contraception, which require them to be covered, how much of them -- how much coverage are they obliged to pay for. even though they are corporations, not individuals.

the court has held that at least, privately held companies, do have a right to maintain religious objections to their obligations under the law. >> so these latest cases have an additional wrinkle. they look at not only private companies, but also religiously affiliated institutions, schools, hospitals, that's now want to do this. the administration has offered them a conference. they say, in essence, if you sign a form, we will take care of it for you. you do not have to pay for. we will take care of it, the insurance company will take care of it. the objection now is that even signing the form makes them complicit into something that is sinful. most appeals courts say that is too remote and arguments. but one appeals court has gone the other way, so this religiously affiliated institution, whether they have to sign a form, is probably the next frontier. they have not taken a case yet. but they probably will. , charlie rose: what abortion case will they take?

>> there was a sweep in the midterm elections i republicans and restrictions on abortion. in state after state, there were additional restrictions on abortion added. 20 week, no abortions after 20 weeks. many new requirements for the facilities that have -- where abortions can be a duck -- can be conducted, whether doctors have mitigating privileges and nearby hospitals, basically all of those requirements have been percolating through the courts in challenges by abortion rights organizations, and at least some of them, i think, are likely to be before the court this term. >> if i had to guess, the leading case comes out of texas. a couple of the kinds of provisions that he just mentioned, basically would drive the number of abortions in texas from 40 to 10. the court has interceded in the case. i think the case in texas is the most likely candidate. ♪

♪ charlie rose: ok. what they may decide is, if states have gone too far in restricting abortion. >> that is correct. >> that is the argument. it is interesting, the supreme court has really not engaged with the subject of abortion much at all in recent years. the --as 2007, with

where they upheld the partial birth abortion law. nothing since then. the question is, the legal term of art the court has adopted is, "undue burden." it does not necessarily clear any definition and "undue burden" will probably mean what anthony kennedy thinks it means. charlie rose: i thought you knew what it meant. >> we will find out when he votes. >> bear in mind that lands in the heart of the presidential campaign. so that will thrust of the , issues and the courts into the campaign. charlie rose: what about death penalty? is that an issue coming up? >>

it is coming up in bits and pieces. on the last day of the term, we had a major statement from breyer and ginsburg saying that they think the death penalty is unconstitutional and they would like to hear a big challenge to allow the court to take a fresh look at the large question as to whether the death penalty is constitutional. that case is not yet arrived. there are a bunch of questions docketh cases on the including whether prosecutors , can knock off every black on a jury. >> the country has passed either -- passed by the supreme court on the death penalty. the death penalty is shrinking at a rapid pace. charlie rose: is that because of dna evidence being used to show that people on death row are innocent? are there other factors? >> there are a bunch of factors. it is a vigorous debate on what is going on. it -- the jurors are spooked by dna exonerations. the costs are very high.

a lot of counties do not want to pay for these. there is less crime in the united states than it used to be in the there are fewer 1990's. opportunities to seek the death penalty. and you combine all of that and , the new requirements from the supreme court in cases that are difficult and no one knows how to execute these people. >> cruel and unusual. >> even the methods that have been approved by the courts, the so-called three drug cocktail, they cannot find the drugs. thingsh all of those there have been 22 executions in , the beginning of october and it is heading towards a low since the death penalty was reinstated. >> the numbers are going down. it is not going to be zero without the court. maybe it is tolerable. it is not a large number in all, but just this past week, three

nights in a row, the court was looking at days of execution. they are still very much in the business of tinkering with the machinery of death. charlie rose: the book that was talked about said that it was "cruel and unusual." >> there has not been a death sentence in texas. texas. there has not been a single one in texas this year. charlie rose: wow. what state has the most? >> texas, california, virginia. in california, there are hundreds on death row and they have had a handful of executions. >> they have hundreds of people on death row. but they have had a handful of budget -- executions since 1976. >> virginia has relatively few and executes efficiently. charlie rose: how do they do it? >> lethal injection. lethal injection. it is the most universal method. >> the absence of required drugs

has made it problematic and oklahoma has struggled with getting the drugs the supreme court has approved. a lot of european suppliers refuse to produce them for this purpose. they are scrambling. charlie rose: is there any progress in terms of televising supreme court arguments? >> i think we are probably moving in the opposite direction. charlie rose: why is that? adam: in the last term, there were three different protests and two were over citizens united and the other was same-sex marriage. and if cameras make that more , likely, that adds to the court's sense that the nice proceeding may or having will be disrupted or give rise to grandstanding. but when they talk about grandstanding, they know it is not the advocates. they think it's themselves.

he cannot control themselves. >> both kagan and sotomayor said they were open to it. they both now have stockholm syndrome. they are now captive and they are identifying their captors, and now they're worried about cameras. charlie rose: who are we defining as the captors? >> the other seven justices. the only thing we could hope for, maybe adam will disagree, i think they could move toward streaming the audio live. >> they should have same-day audio. it would be child's play. now they have at the end of the week. or as you suggested, live audio. today, they accidentally posted same-day audio and they took it down. but that does didn't stray that they are capable of doing it. charlie rose: if you look at the supreme court calendar, it is what anthony kennedy decides to vote deciding what they decide.

>> i will sign on to that. >> in the controversial 5-4 cases, he will be the deciding justice 2/3rds of the time. >> that is a great will to play internet? >> it is good to be anthony kennedy. maybe adam disagrees, but i do not think there has ever been a justice who has been this much of a swing justice. lewis powell had a lot of panter. -- had a lot of power. but it was not always this clear a division. >> the ideological center of the supreme court used to be 2-3 justices. when you would argue to the court, you would look around a little bit, because you thought several votes were in play. now, you speak to anthony kennedy. charlie rose: who is the smartest person on the court?

>> they are all smart. they really are. i'm not finished. i think roberts is the smartest, in terms of role. >> he is a raw intellectual and he has written better opinions. in terms of mastery of the information -- charlie rose: in terms of overall power, scalia. >> in terms of raw power -- however you want to define it, -- >> i believe that it is still early in her tenure but, kagan. there's every potential to think that he she will be his equal. >> roberts seems to have a real interest in business. >> yes. that is something i view as a

mistake, on my part. in that i have not emphasized , that enough in describing the roberts court, particularly with lawsuits against businesses. if you have an individual on one side and a corporation on the other, i can tell you with 80% certainty, i can tell you who is going to win. knowing nothing else about the case. they really do not like personal injury lawyers, personal lawsuits, civil litigation. it is very pro-business. charlie rose: do you agree? >> absolutely. the george w. bush appointees are the most pro-business justices. this term, we are going to see them go after class actions. i don't think class actions are going to look very good. >> and labor unions. they do not like labor unions and there is a case in

california with public employee unions where they could cripple the ability to get money from public employees, which would hurt democrats. >> this court, i don't think it has huge differences on environmental justice. -- criminal justice. sonia has taken it upon herself to be the guardian of the criminal docket. to be the chief monitor. charlie rose: she was a prosecutor. >> in a jurisdiction that was more liberal and the rest of the -- than the rest of the country, and she, i think, has taken a particular interest in that subject. but, by and large, this is a pro-law-enforcement court. you do not see a lot of convictions overturned. >> i have one footnote. i see that sometimes this court

is suspicious of the government and overcome an ovation. in the last term, the federal prosecutors had a fairly bad term. it is a court that will sometimes think that the government is bad even when big , government is the prosecutor. >> in line with what adam said today, they declined to hear a case that was a huge defeat for the attorney in new york on insider trading. he chose not to hear it. the second circuit court overturned the convictions on the basis of prosecutor pushed too hard and the version of insider trading done was not unlawful. it was a successful prosecution and they overturned the conviction. the supreme court let that ruling stand. charlie rose: it was overturned. >> the insider trading cases may be harder to make as a result. non-decision.

>> is the supreme court as exciting as it always has been? >> i think it is in a holding pattern as we wait for the generational turnover. vacancies tend to come in groups. yes it is true that john paul , stevens served until he was 90. so i suppose all of these justices in their late 70's and early 80's could wait until chelsea clinton is president to lead. but, i think it is likely that several of them will leave in the next few years. charlie rose: especially -- let's see, i said who it was. >> ginsburg is 83 and scalia is 79 now. >> breyer is 77. you have four likely candidates to go. depending on the alignment, if they are public and gets to replace one of the democratic appointees or vice versa, that

changes the fabric of american life. >> i asked to as the smartest, who is the best writer? >> i said roberts. kagan is a good writer. as someone who did not write a lot as a law professor, it is kind of surprising, but she is very conversational. >> those two are very good. scalia, in his heyday, was a transformative thinker and an excellent writer. that still services from time to time. charlie rose: and a great talker. >> a charming man. >> the most important justice. the most influential. in terms of the development of the law, absolutely. intellectually, scalia, by a wide margin. charlie rose: thank you for coming. from fun at the supreme court, we turn to claire danes and the new season of homeland! back in a moment. ♪

charlie rose: claire danes is here and homeland has returned to show time. she plays and ask cia agent. the new yorker praises her performance and says that she is a stand-in for the post-9/11 psychology. she is a sadistic bully. -- seductive bully. she has received two emmys and

to golden globes her performance. i spoke with her about her career and the upcoming season of homeland. and, other things. homeland is back. >> we are old. we have been around for a while. i cannot believe how many years and we are. it still feels very electric and vital. charlie rose: where is kerry? >> she is actually happy, amazingly. very exotic. no, but she is in the private sector. she has quit the business. she was very disillusioned by what she experienced in season four and she felt betrayed by her mentor and friend. so, she is working for a benevolent billionaire and is the head of security for the firm. she has a lovely boyfriend who

is a lawyer and they are living together. things are going well and she is very connected to her baby. about five minutes of domestic bliss. charlie rose: she is back. >> yes. in the first episode her boss is , a progressive philanthropist. he is wanting to help refugees at a camp. in lebanon. so, she, she protests and says this is a terrible idea. but she goes anyways and there , is the assassination attempt. she assumes it is her boss who is the target and she discovers that she, actually, is the target. she has to figure out who is

trying to kill her and why. charlie rose: and then, we find that saul had to come back to berlin. >> right. >> that is a big engine of the season. >> and brings them back together. there is a massive cyber penetration in a berlin asian, and it is a couple of kids who sort of stumble into this incredible world -- portal and -- charlie rose: a snowden thing. >> exactly. it creates great chaos. charlie rose: where is she? we see her in episode she is no cia, and shein the is happy. her bipolar disorder is under control. >> she is taking her lithium everyday. i think that she and a big theme for her this year is the history is not something she can excuse

herself from. charlie rose: it used to be that, whatever she did, somehow it was ok because she did good things for the agency. >> i think that she -- >> she did not have a life before and she did not think she could have a life. she did not think that she was entitled to that or that it was possible because of her illness. she thought that her illness is going to make terrible havoc and suffering within any intimate relationship that she tended to forge. so, she just gave it up entirely, so she has this epiphany at the end of the last season, that maybe that is not the case, that maybe her condition will not prevent her from happiness. so, she is trying that on and

she is experiencing with that, and it works. but, yes, she is not acknowledging and this new iteration, is that she does have an incredible gift. charlie rose: what does she bring to you? because you talk about how great , it is. >> mandy is a powerful performer and a brilliant musician and singer. that informs his approach to acting. so, it is quite rare and specific to him. and it is a joy to play with. you know, but we did the first reading of the pilot, obviously, we were all very new to each other, and as soon as we started

our first scene, it was just clear, that there was this relationship there, already, that we just kind of walked into. it really took us -- it took us by such surprise, and he is so fun. obvious the kerry is a fast , talker and has this staccato. at a very high frequency. he is the opposite of that. charlie rose: here is what he said. it was glorious. i just loved it. there was a chemistry. she was riveting. all i have to do is listen. >> i feel identical. those would be my words exactly. i just am so -- every choice he makes is so particular to his spirit and it could never be reproduced or imitated by anyone.

it is always compelling and it is always inspiring. it makes me do something new that i am not sure of. charlie rose: you said you know his process, how to run, how to play with them. it is a gift to get to know this actor over this many years in an always-new context. it is like being in a marriage. >> yes. it is. we have been at this for five years. we have outran a lot of marriages. it is a happy marriage. to have that trust and that history and that shorthand is such a privilege. >> the marriage to the agency, she can never leave. >> i do not think she can. i think she rediscovers this.

>> in season five. >> in the beginning of season five, she is relieved. she does not miss it. i kind of miss her playing it and i missed the joy i had. in her relationship to her work. she really does love her work. it is fun. charlie: there is a saying in russia, and i said this to vladimir putin there is no such , thing as a former kgb. once a kgb agent, always a kgb agent. there's something about the

culture, and something about the house of mirrors and life on the precipice. that is its own -- >> i think it is very intoxicating and addictive. because the stakes are so very , high. and, you know, there are actors acting. but, for real, i cannot imagine that. >> i cannot imagine being a cia agent. >> not really. i try. charlie rose: you have met them and talked to them. >> yeah. they, you know, i have a spy big sister. it is really fun. she is wonderful. charlie rose: does she inform

you into what you might think and feel? >> yes she does. i learned the most from observing her behavior and the way she talks. as much is what she says. charlie: what does it say about you that you into yale when you are already a very successful actor because you wanted what? >> i had been a kid actor. i started this when i was 12. charlie and thought about it : when you were three. >> exactly. i did not really get to go to high school. i was tutored on location and trailers in very odd costumes and a really kind of fractured way, and i'm ever taking my sats when i was making a movie, and i had done a night shoot, and i

was dropped off at the school with my number two pencil. i was so disoriented. but that was my high school , experience. i was lonely and just working with adults. and so i wanted to go to college , to socialize and learn. that is probably true for most people. but there was another level of , urgency for me. not only your curiosity, but also, the socializing process. >> it was vital for me. i was feeling weird. i didn't know how to hang out. it is very important to know how to do that. charlie: not having the necessary "at ease" with your contemporaries. >> i was self-conscious and becoming a bonsai tree.

charlie: what is your director said that when you are 13 you were so good that it was a little scary. this is at 13. >> that is nice to hear. charlie you do not know what : makes you scary? it is a commanding presence. >> it is funny, because yes, i was a kid actor, but i never thought of myself as that. i was an actor who was a kid. it was incidental. charlie rose: everything inside of you said that you were an actor. >> i started taking acting class when i was 10 years old, and such so furious commitment and fervor, and i really meant it. people said, you are only 10. and i thought, only 10, i have been doing this forever. i'm exhausted. plenty of material. i think one afternoon, as i am one-day-old, is enough.

to make something. charlie: i am strictly going off to college, because it is about an intellectual curiosity. you care about knowing what is really -- you have been a student of being dipolar. what it means and how to ask you. >> i thought i was going to be a psychology major and it was an interest. that was a was my plan b. to go into psychology and become a therapist. now, i get to do both. charlie you did not graduate : because the degree did not mean that much to you. >> i understood the experience and i figured out how to hang out. i got all the fundamentals of higher education, and learned how to think critically, discerning late, and how to i'm sure this,

goes with an further developed and the extra for years, but i thought that i was going to be able to act every summer. and, it does not work that way. i fail to realize how much work goes into getting work. i was not available to do reads for scripps. a project that starts in july we get pushed to october, and three years past, and i had not acted. i missed it terribly. charlie: that sounds like your character. she misses the cia like you missed acting. >> i did. i needed to do it again. also, one of the things about going to school was to commit to acting as an adult. i wanted to make sure that i was not just doing it out of habit or based on a decision i had made as a 10-year-old. i needed to reevaluate and renew my vows. charlie rose: to? >> to being a performer. charlie rose: what is your ambition?

>> my ambition always is to work creatively ambitious and like-minded people and be working writing material that makes me a little bigger in the world and the world a little better. and, you know, to be a ham and get paid for it. it is great. and, you know, have a life, friendships that are intact and matter in a relationship. with my husband. charlie rose: they say you are constantly doing lines with each other. >> we are. sometimes in the taxi. i will read his lines. we are always doing it with each other.

charlie rose: when you look at the success of this. five years, it is not like a movie here that you do. then you go do another movie. you have inhabited this and shaped it. is that acting at its best? >> it is really interesting and it is sort of like the 7up series or the boyhood project, it really is an amazing project, to grow up alongside a care to a real-time. and finding it fascinating i am fascinated that i still find it fascinating. that is pretty special. charlie rose: after five-year's, it is still vital to you. >> it still feels like i'm figuring it out. you still have to crack it. there is the danger of falling into old habits. there is a complacency.

but the show runner and his , team, they are always pushing the boundaries further for themselves and demand that the actors follow suit and do the same. charlie rose: what do you have to crack? >> there is a new challenge every year. so last year, it was how to grieve loss and decide if that was a true love or not. can she have a life and do this work? there is that. this year, i think it is the opposite of that. but ultimately, she will have to , find a way to integrate her passion. >> new life with her passion. >> yes. who is kerry as a mother?

charlie she puts her baby on an : airplane in episode three. >> she does not want to and she feels genuinely bad about it. charlie rose: i know, i know. but, in the end, it is such a love for her daughter that she does not want to put her at? >> that is right. it is the responsible choice. but, i cannot imagine a greater sacrifice. how horrendous. charlie rose: you are the narrator. >> a very unreliable one. charlie rose: that is what they describe. the unreliable narrator. what do they mean by that, because -- >> she cannot even trust herself. her brain chemistry is such that she may be responding to a delusion or craziness.

yeah. that makes it very exciting. charlie rose: the atlantic says that she is unstable and extraordinary. although her brain chemistry for its -- thwarts space her chances for happiness and give her a streak of genius that make her the most effective weapon. does that resonate? >> it does. i think the idea of brilliant leaders -- maybe they have to be a little eccentric? maybe they have to be a little forward thinking and idiosyncratic. maybe they should not fit into the mold. charlie rose: there are a lot of people in these places.

>> that is right. charlie rose: what have you learned about the relationship with bipolar? >> there is a lot of evidence that bipolar and genius are connected. there are a lot of examples of genius minds -- yeah. anyways. charlie rose: here we are in year five and it seems to me that she is as fresh and as fascinating as you in season one. she is just in a different plane. season four was a transition and now, she is fully in the transition. yet, being pulled back. as you talk about it, as enormously exciting and fresh for you and not you saying, ok we go with another season. >> exactly.

i was being a little glib and facetious. i said, well, she is happy. but actually what does that mean , for her? i have never experienced that before as her. what does that look like? i have to lay that down and design it. charlie rose: everybody always asked you this. where -- what is the relationship between carrie and claire? what you find in her -- >> my joke answer is that we are both blonde. charlie: we want to go beyond that. >> of course. the differences are more obvious than the similarities. we both love our work all stop that sounds ridiculous.

we both have this gift of being deeply attracted to our respective lines of work. there's a lot of role-playing involved in both. a lot of travel. but i think that i have a kind , of linear focus and can be quite driven and very hard on myself. i think she is also those things and we are pretty earnest. we both care a lot. like a little too much. i love that she is such a protagonist and she drives the action forward. that is unusual to have as a woman. charlie rose: to be that. >> to be the answer. charlie rose: you are not that in real life?

you cannot do what you have done without driving. >> that is true also thank you for saying that. i men's that in most fiction out there, and most projects, it is really not the woman who -- charlie rose: and therefore, it is really wonderful. >> right. i cannot believe my luck. that i have this much room to play. charlie: because it is all the instinct of you as a human being and as an actor. that she is the way that she is. all that i feel, i can show. >> i love that she gets to be powerful, assertive, and courageous. and extremely vulnerable. because i think real vulnerability does require courage. and people are little bit confused about that in this culture.

there is the cry face meme and i am flattered by it. because, i, you know, i get to be and expose real ugly stuff, real stuff that is sometimes ugly. but, i think it is just human and true and there are not many outlets for it in pop culture. here is one. i am a professional feeler. i like feelings. i am for them. i get to do that here a lot. and also be -- and also save the day. charlie: does empathy play anything for you? >> that is what i do. i am an empath. i get to really understand what

it is to be a different person and see the world from a different place. and, is that freedom -- it is just thrilling. i discover that we are all connected and it encourages a tolerance that is beautiful and reassuring. for me, personally. charlie: have you ever had , and you're like, not bipolar or sometime this issue, but the sense that you are a bit crazy? , i want to use the right terms because people in the mental health world are careful about that. understandably so. they are careful about not using terms that stereotype a real thing.

but, for you do you feel out of , control? >> of course. yes. as a young person, as a kid, i had a very unruly imagination that took me some time to understand and harness. charlie rose: harness is the right word. >> right. i think it is true for most kids when the brains are developing, , i really had to figure out how to differentiate the real from the unreal. charlie rose: how did you do it? >> practice. charlie rose: has this stimulated an interest in you in spy craft? but just out of general interest. this world of intrigue and knowing who knows what when and where? >> yes, i am still amazed that

it actually exists. and that there is this huge underworld and subculture that is above ground. charlie: i have an interesting story. there is a moment where he said, -- i said, how do you know, and he said, i know. i have friends who have people there. do you think that i stop talking? we know what you did. >> i think that worked is kind of in gender a paranoia. are you really paranoid if they are in fact after you? if they can be supported by facts. it is a difficult state to be in. charlie rose: i'm interested in this idea of what people are curious about beyond me. someone who both loves and is interested in interviewing and

stuff in that world, and knows you, what are people curious about with respect to the series? what is your feedback? is it personal? what? >> i think that they care about her struggle, her personal struggle. charlie her vulnerability. :>> her vulnerability. that amazing juxtaposition of vulnerability and power and strength. and i think that we explore what it is to work and we understand the sacrifice that patriots make and how lonely and experience that can be. these isolated characters kind of reach for each other to forge

some connection, and i think that is interesting and exciting. and moving. charlie rose: thank you. it is great to see you. >> nice to see you. ♪

♪ rishaad: it is wednesday, the seventh of october. this is "trending business." ♪ rishaad: here is a look at what isre watching, samsung bidding smart phones and tablets. the price is the most in four months, a gloomy forecast with its global growth outlook. weak commodities on the markets.

ties, they will restructure to contain the influence of the french government. they want the relationship to be more balance. let us know which of think of our top stories by following us on twitter. we have the oil price, samsung profit boosting. day for: another good asian equities. we are seeing a section of games and makes newsh coming through. taiwan is looking good, korea getting a really good boost from samsung. although, those oil producers are looking really good today. rally.% following that a big jump in